Quote:
Originally Posted by Rebellion";p="
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashleykennedy";p="
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rebellion";p="
Quote:
Originally Posted by apotropoxy";p="
Last year Ernst Uhrlau, the head of German intelligence, said Tehran would not be able to produce enough material for a nuclear bomb before 2010 and would only be able to make it into a weapon by about 2015.
Worry not, D.
The War Criminal-In-Chief is using those old shaped charged explosive devices which have been killing our GIs for the last three years as his pretext to attack Persia. You won't have to wait long.
The Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, informed the world last week that American interests around the world will be targeted if we attack his country.
You are a GloryWarrior and are welcomed to enlist in Bush the Lame's "long war."
|
Wonderful idea, let's wait until 2010 to do something about it.  No wonder the dems are viewed so poorly when it comes to national security. I wonder who the dems will nominate to be Appeaser in Chief in '08. |
And what would you propose to do now?
Bomb and end up with a more radical regime in Iran?
Or invade, and where would you get troops from?
The US does not have a military option. |
It can bomb the ever living bejeezus out of their facilities. That won't necessarily mean a regime change. Israel did the same thing with Iraq and Saddam still stayed in power. That said, if it ousted the current leader, who isn't even liked by many of his own people, the chances are better of someone less radical entering in his place than someone more radical. |
You think declaring war on another nation would not make that nation more radical. The US under Bush became more radical after the twin towers got demolished what makes you think you need a regime change to become more radical. Look at the events in Iraq if you think the US can bomb a nation into a form of western democracy.
The US does not have a realistic military option.